Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Schroedinger's Wounding (Forked Thread: Disappointed in 4e)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="GlaziusF" data-source="post: 4557105" data-attributes="member: 74166"><p>But the thing is, you'd be wrong, at least when you're put up against other humans told to judge your responses based on creativity.</p><p></p><p>That's the giant paradox of the whole thing - that when told to judge how creative something is, people judge it by how different it is from what they themselves would create when told to be creative.</p><p></p><p>"Here are some guidelines: be creative" is pretty much guaranteed to fail. Not that "here are no guidelines" is really any better, because then people work from the underlying bits.</p><p></p><p>Such as, for example, taking the ratio scale of hit point numbers and constructing a model based on what they know about ratio scales - linear continuums with a defined zero point.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Okay, but now you've replaced a single problem with hit points with a varying set of problems about hit points:</p><p></p><p>If all the examples shared a common theme, people would triangulate toward that theme.</p><p></p><p>If all the examples were completely random, people would complain they didn't think any of them fit, and then blink uncomprehendingly when told, yes, that's the point.</p><p></p><p>If the examples were based around power origin, such as my three, then you'd have people of one origin complaining its associated damage model didn't work for them and another origins might work better, and blinking uncomprehendingly when told, yes, that's the point.</p><p></p><p>And NO MATTER WHAT you'd have everybody who doesn't give a care about narrating hit points complaining about all this arty-farty imagination-and-rainbows crap in their D&D.</p><p></p><p>It wouldn't matter that the part about hit points was clearly marked as optional. I mean:</p><p></p><p><strong>OPTIONAL OPTIONAL OPTIONAL</strong> You may possibly now want to think about something that may be a red sports car <strong>OH GOD THAT WAS OPTIONAL YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO DO IT</strong></p><p></p><p>And how well did that work? </p><p></p><p>Ideas tend to stick.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="GlaziusF, post: 4557105, member: 74166"] But the thing is, you'd be wrong, at least when you're put up against other humans told to judge your responses based on creativity. That's the giant paradox of the whole thing - that when told to judge how creative something is, people judge it by how different it is from what they themselves would create when told to be creative. "Here are some guidelines: be creative" is pretty much guaranteed to fail. Not that "here are no guidelines" is really any better, because then people work from the underlying bits. Such as, for example, taking the ratio scale of hit point numbers and constructing a model based on what they know about ratio scales - linear continuums with a defined zero point. Okay, but now you've replaced a single problem with hit points with a varying set of problems about hit points: If all the examples shared a common theme, people would triangulate toward that theme. If all the examples were completely random, people would complain they didn't think any of them fit, and then blink uncomprehendingly when told, yes, that's the point. If the examples were based around power origin, such as my three, then you'd have people of one origin complaining its associated damage model didn't work for them and another origins might work better, and blinking uncomprehendingly when told, yes, that's the point. And NO MATTER WHAT you'd have everybody who doesn't give a care about narrating hit points complaining about all this arty-farty imagination-and-rainbows crap in their D&D. It wouldn't matter that the part about hit points was clearly marked as optional. I mean: [B]OPTIONAL OPTIONAL OPTIONAL[/B] You may possibly now want to think about something that may be a red sports car [B]OH GOD THAT WAS OPTIONAL YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO DO IT[/B] And how well did that work? Ideas tend to stick. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Schroedinger's Wounding (Forked Thread: Disappointed in 4e)
Top